U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > Long Island
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 02-04-2009, 10:34 AM
 
1,303 posts, read 2,121,088 times
Reputation: 329

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by totallyfrazzled View Post
You're assuming all, or even most, seniors had children; OR had children that went through the Long Island school system. Not necessarily so.

Neither my SO nor I ever had children. We both have another 5 years to go before we can qualify for the age-related STAR. Both of us have been homeowners on LI since we were in our early 30s... so we have BOTH been subsidizing other peoples' kids for 30 years at "full price" and are going to be doing so for another 5 years before getting any kind of a break.

SO's sister is in her late 50s and also never had children and has been a homeowner for over 20 years.

My brother had one child (my nephew) but he did not go through the LI public school system; he went to a private school. So my brother (now deceased) not only subsidized the education of other kids but paid twice (for them and his own).

So there you have four people within just one family group who did not "enjoy the subsidy of others".
This perspective, in a region where your property value is tied significantly to the performance of your schools, simply does not work. Even if you do not send any children through the schools you benefit on resale and equity in your home based on school performance. I am willing to give it a go if a homeowner who paid zero school taxes in a Half Hollow Hills for instance, is willing to give back a percentage of their sale proceeds based on the school district premium they receive at the time of sale. That in my mind is enjoying the subsidy of others.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-04-2009, 10:43 AM
 
651 posts, read 1,385,208 times
Reputation: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
It has quite a bit to do about $$. Quite simply it generally takes more $$ to educate poor students than wealthy students. Its not about people not caring about the education in the area, its about the $$ not being there to deliver what is needed in order for the schools to help overcome the economic problems in the area. In Wyandanch and Roosevelt your dealing with a student body which is quite poor, in Chaminade your dealing with a student body which is mostly upper middle class.

I still disagree with you. Roosevelt just got a state of the art new school building with all of the bells and whistles and their overall scores are the same (I know...my friend teaches there). Also, you talk about not enough money for quality teachers in another post....but my friend in Roosevelt makes a competative LI salary and she definately makes more than my friends that teach in Queens. They also implemented a new reading program with new books, but she says they have all of the old problems. Although she is happy to be out of the temporary trailer, more money did not equal change.

Are you insinuating that Wyandanch S.D.can't afford basics for their kids. If you are, you are highly mistaken. Wyandanch does not differ much from other districts and actually receives more money from the state than other districts due to need. This means that they have enough money to educate the students. That is why I disagree with you.

Throwing more money at Wyandanch will not change the type of kid that attends. I am almost certain that if you remove Wyandanch kids from the school and send kids from Jericho to Wyandanch schools with the Wyandanch budget, their scores would remain high. If you ship Wynadanch kids to Jericho with a Jericho budget, their scores would never replicate the Jericho kids.

Money doesn't solve problems. You can lead a horse to water....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2009, 10:46 AM
 
Location: Inis Fada
13,827 posts, read 16,189,890 times
Reputation: 4650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
Of course they are, however look at the income differences between Plainedge, and Roosevelt or Wyandanch. Plainedge is by no means a wealthy area, its probably a perfect example of a hard working middle class community.
School taxes are based upon property assessments, not income.

Yes, Plainedge is a hard working middle class area. Many of the owners I knew growing up there are being forced out by escalating taxes, like they are elsewhere on LI.

(I am leaving Wyandanch out of the following as it is in Suffolk County, and therefore assessed differently.)

Here we have two homes -- one in Roosevelt SD, one in Plainedge SD; both have the same # bedrooms and baths.

The person buying in Roosevelt is going to pay almost 50% less in taxes than the person buying in Plainedge.

Would you suggest that the hard working, middle class person in Plainedge, who is already being taxed out the wazoo, pay more to subsidize the people in Roosevelt? Or would you suggest that the higher priced homes in Roosevelt be properly assessed to carry their fair share of the district's tax burden?

If someone can afford to pay $430K in Roosevelt, shouldn't their taxes be more in line with other homes in that range? I can't understand why so many homes in Roosevelt, asking under $200K are also paying somewhere in the $6K range like the $430K house does. $6K a month seems close to fair on a low priced home, considering the services that are provided between schools and county. $6K a month on a $430K house is a SLAP in the face of every other home owner in Nassau who is struggling -- how many people in Levittown, East Meadow, etc., are paying far more than that for far less home?




ROOSEVELT$430,000 Hi Ranch, 1 Family
10.0 Rooms
5 Bedrooms, 2.0 Baths
Garage: 1.0 Att
ML#: 2126883Annual Taxes: $6,000
Roosevelt School District
Year Built: 1971
Lot Size: 60 X 116

--------------------------------N. MASSAPEQUA$425,000 2 Story, 1 Family
10.0 Rooms
5 Bedrooms, 2.0 Baths

Annual Taxes: $11,645
Plainedge School District
Year Built: 1958
Lot Size: 40X100

ML#: 2109963



Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2009, 10:48 AM
 
Location: Inis Fada
13,827 posts, read 16,189,890 times
Reputation: 4650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jrprofess View Post
This perspective, in a region where your property value is tied significantly to the performance of your schools, simply does not work. Even if you do not send any children through the schools you benefit on resale and equity in your home based on school performance. I am willing to give it a go if a homeowner who paid zero school taxes in a Half Hollow Hills for instance, is willing to give back a percentage of their sale proceeds based on the school district premium they receive at the time of sale. That in my mind is enjoying the subsidy of others.
Perfect example that the intrinsic value of the school district has in relation to the price of the home.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2009, 10:52 AM
 
1,303 posts, read 2,121,088 times
Reputation: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadPool1998 View Post
Efficiency isn't always good; it's good for a business model but it doesn't strike me as having any enhancing effect on schools and learning.
I think the problem with "efficiency" is that it feels highly inefficient and cumbersome to get there...but when it is finally reached through process improvements, economies of scale, automation which eliminates the need for excess paper pushers on payroll, and a real "audit" process the benefit to schools becomes a lack of service cut-backs to programs both athletic and academic and the continued ability to operate without pricing households out of a region. These school districts run budgets in the 100's of millions. Larger than most businesses. So if efficiency is good for business, I would think it would be good for districts running operating budgets larger than 80% of the businesses in our country.

Affluent districts like Syosset and Jericho, amongst others, are excessing long-tenured teachers for the first time. The elementary schools in these and other districts have priced out younger families who simply can not afford the tax bill and to raise a new family. So this tax bill issue is finally showing its downside, even to the very teachers formerly on contract in a school district. I just think it needs to be addressed within the local board of ed and immediate community.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2009, 10:59 AM
Status: "For President 2016" (set 5 days ago)
 
Location: In my house
3,263 posts, read 4,888,329 times
Reputation: 1306
Consolidating is not the answer for LI. It wont work.
There needs to be some way to put more control of the school districts and budget in the hands of the taxpayer. Directly, or indirectly. There is so much taxpayer waste within many school districts, from certain salaries to financial ignorance to plain old corruption.

Corruption doesn't necessarily mean that in the popular sense of the word, that some admin is skimming money and putting it in their pocket etc,

Corruption is as simple as misuse of school resources, like using a postage stamp to mail your own LIPA bill, or "borrowing" some paper for your home printer because you ran out. Some of this stuff happens on a daily basis, many times innocently, other times intentionally. It's pennies or a few bucks here and there, but in the end, it all adds up.

The taxpayers should be able to vote in any employee in the school district above the grunt level, such as teachers, custodians, lunch lady etc...
"Public" school district. Many things don't seem so "public".
The taxpayers should have ready access to financial records.
School tax is a bill right? just like paying LIPA, why are we not given an itemized bill for our tax money? What exactly are you doing with my $9k?
Some of this seems a little far fetched and silly, but if any of this were in effect,
I bet you there would be alot more people on their toes in the school districts.
Aside from getting busted for plain old fashioned corruption, there is no penalty or recourse when someone makes a mistake. Employees need to be held more accountable foe their actions.

Who knows, at this point any idea seems off the wall. It is a very difficult hair to split. Most people don't want the kids to suffer from budget problems and such, (and most of the times it is the kids who get hit first), but at the same time, the system is broken and in dire need of some sort of rational and sensible fix.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2009, 01:45 PM
 
843 posts, read 1,171,526 times
Reputation: 309
Default If that were true...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jrprofess View Post
I think the problem with "efficiency" is that it feels highly inefficient and cumbersome to get there...but when it is finally reached through process improvements, economies of scale, automation which eliminates the need for excess paper pushers on payroll, and a real "audit" process the benefit to schools becomes a lack of service cut-backs to programs both athletic and academic and the continued ability to operate without pricing households out of a region. These school districts run budgets in the 100's of millions. Larger than most businesses. So if efficiency is good for business, I would think it would be good for districts running operating budgets larger than 80% of the businesses in our country.

Affluent districts like Syosset and Jericho, amongst others, are excessing long-tenured teachers for the first time. The elementary schools in these and other districts have priced out younger families who simply can not afford the tax bill and to raise a new family. So this tax bill issue is finally showing its downside, even to the very teachers formerly on contract in a school district. I just think it needs to be addressed within the local board of ed and immediate community.
Then private corporate teaching experiments would have taken off. Their number one priority was profit. As such, efficiency is essential. They have almost completely failed wherever they've been tried, except for sectarian and trade-oriented situations. The latter two situations work better because they don't pursue efficiency. The arch-diocese of NY or Chicago would have benefited long ago from consolidation and what not. They haven't. In many ways, efforts to affect efficiency caused backlash.

Listen, budgets are hardly bloated because of paper and pencil pushers. The vast majority of costs come from facilities and teachers. Nibbling around the edges is a waste - so I guess it's inefficient.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2009, 01:56 PM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
14,282 posts, read 7,649,692 times
Reputation: 2513
Quote:
Originally Posted by llama8 View Post
I still disagree with you. Roosevelt just got a state of the art new school building with all of the bells and whistles and their overall scores are the same (I know...my friend teaches there). Also, you talk about not enough money for quality teachers in another post....but my friend in Roosevelt makes a competative LI salary and she definately makes more than my friends that teach in Queens. They also implemented a new reading program with new books, but she says they have all of the old problems. Although she is happy to be out of the temporary trailer, more money did not equal change.

Are you insinuating that Wyandanch S.D.can't afford basics for their kids. If you are, you are highly mistaken. Wyandanch does not differ much from other districts and actually receives more money from the state than other districts due to need. This means that they have enough money to educate the students. That is why I disagree with you.

Throwing more money at Wyandanch will not change the type of kid that attends. I am almost certain that if you remove Wyandanch kids from the school and send kids from Jericho to Wyandanch schools with the Wyandanch budget, their scores would remain high. If you ship Wynadanch kids to Jericho with a Jericho budget, their scores would never replicate the Jericho kids.

Money doesn't solve problems. You can lead a horse to water....

Wyandanch does receive more money from the state than the others, however due to the much weaker tax base it doesn't make up for the state aid differences. Theper pupil spending is generally lower in the poor districts such as Wyandanch and when things such as the spending on various economic aid programs are taken into considertion (which is calcualted in the per pupil spending) the differences are even more.

I am not suggesting that throwing more $$ will solve all of the problems, there are obviosuly other structual problems that need to be dealt with, the overriding economic issues is a major one. The main point I was making is just because people are in a poor performing school district doesn't mean that they don't care about education.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2009, 02:49 PM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
14,282 posts, read 7,649,692 times
Reputation: 2513
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhBeeHave View Post
School taxes are based upon property assessments, not income.

Yes, Plainedge is a hard working middle class area. Many of the owners I knew growing up there are being forced out by escalating taxes, like they are elsewhere on LI.

(I am leaving Wyandanch out of the following as it is in Suffolk County, and therefore assessed differently.)

Here we have two homes -- one in Roosevelt SD, one in Plainedge SD; both have the same # bedrooms and baths.

The person buying in Roosevelt is going to pay almost 50% less in taxes than the person buying in Plainedge.

Would you suggest that the hard working, middle class person in Plainedge, who is already being taxed out the wazoo, pay more to subsidize the people in Roosevelt? Or would you suggest that the higher priced homes in Roosevelt be properly assessed to carry their fair share of the district's tax burden?

If someone can afford to pay $430K in Roosevelt, shouldn't their taxes be more in line with other homes in that range? I can't understand why so many homes in Roosevelt, asking under $200K are also paying somewhere in the $6K range like the $430K house does. $6K a month seems close to fair on a low priced home, considering the services that are provided between schools and county. $6K a month on a $430K house is a SLAP in the face of every other home owner in Nassau who is struggling -- how many people in Levittown, East Meadow, etc., are paying far more than that for far less home?




ROOSEVELT$430,000 Hi Ranch, 1 Family
10.0 Rooms
5 Bedrooms, 2.0 Baths
Garage: 1.0 Att
ML#: 2126883Annual Taxes: $6,000
Roosevelt School District
Year Built: 1971
Lot Size: 60 X 116

--------------------------------N. MASSAPEQUA$425,000 2 Story, 1 Family
10.0 Rooms
5 Bedrooms, 2.0 Baths

Annual Taxes: $11,645
Plainedge School District
Year Built: 1958
Lot Size: 40X100

ML#: 2109963



Few things, first off in regards to having one area subsidize the other, I wasn't suggesting Plainedge taxes should go to Roosevelt. I was using that as more of an example of a middle class area compared to a poorer area. Now if we were to have some type of consolidation where lets say the taxes were to be paid out to the county and doled out from there, Plainedge, along with areas such as Levittown and Farmingdale which have very high school tax rates would actually benefit and see their tax burdens reduced. Those who would see the increases or those who would be subsidising them would be the areas with the lower tax rates such as Garden City, Great Neck and Manhasset. The school tax rates in these areas are approx 1/2 of what they are (& in some cases less than 1/2) than other areas.

Now in regards to the two homes you mentioned. First off, just because a home was a certain asking price does not mean they are going to get that asking price. Looking at the comparable homes to the one you looked at in Roosevelt, $430,000 doesn't look like it will happen. Secondly I'm not sure where they pulled that $6,000 figure, found the home on My Nassau Property site & the taxes pre star is 7990.10. Still a bit of a difference, for two homes with a similar asking price and much of that is likely due to the asking price of the home in Roosevelt is out of line with the comps.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2009, 08:15 AM
 
1,289 posts, read 2,518,082 times
Reputation: 687
Theoretically Roosevelt should have a higher per $ value tax rate than Plainedge. Assuming the same % of kids need to attend. Assuming that it costs the same amount to educate. Then the tax burden should be the same as any other area. just b/c there is a house worth 200 in Roosevelt vs 400 in plainedge shouldn't affect how much it costs in taxes.

Everyone is saying don't consolidate don't do it. But then they say the waste is in the pencel pushing administrators and overhead. the only way to fix an overhead issue is to consolidate. The only way to cut waste is to have oversight. You or I getting a bill in the mail is going to do nothing.
1) its not going to be detailed enough to be useful
2) you don't have a voice in how the school is run. get over it. Are you going to tell the Payroll supervisor there that they really don't need the Betty as they have 1 clerk too many?

a more detailed bill is political BS. It sounds all well and good and placates the public, but in the end accomplishes nothing. Local control in LI doesn't seem to work. Check out the town offices, school districts, water districts, sewer districts. All have waste coming out of their ears due to patronage and wasteful administration.

The government, country state and local's job is to look out for the best interest of the people. THey aren't doing it. Tough decisions are going to have to be made for the good of the Island as a whole. Everyone needs stop screaming the sky is falling the sky is falling whenever there is change for fear they're going to lose the cachette and some market value of their sliver of paradise. If there wasn't so much self interest in the process something could actually get done and in a year or so, everyone would be better off.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > Long Island

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top